Search Climate Insights Directory

The document defines climate equity as the fair sharing of the global carbon budget, emphasizing that developed countries bear a 'historical responsibility' due to their past emissions and resource exploitation. It advocates for limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C, which requires an immediate revolution in energy, food, and transport systems. The text calls for a 'system change' over mere climate change, proposing a transition away from neoliberalism and fossil fuels toward community-controlled renewable energy and agroecology, while urging the UN to enforce equitable responsibility among nations.

The document critiques the INDC process, noting that current commitments from developed nations are inadequate and often ignore adaptation, finance, and loss and damage. It argues that allowing countries to self-determine their contributions cannot guarantee the global effort needed to limit warming to 1.5°C. Instead, it proposes a "fair shares" approach, which involves establishing a global carbon budget and dividing it among countries based on their historical responsibility, capacity, and right to a sustainable society.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International and partner organizations denounces the RAI framework as a tool to legitimize land grabbing. It argues that large-scale land acquisitions are driven by financial speculation and result in human rights violations, environmental degradation, and threats to food security. The authors demand the cancellation of existing land grab agreements and the adoption of food sovereignty and agroecological models based on small-scale farming.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) opposes REDD, arguing that carbon markets and financial incentives fail to address the root causes of climate change and instead lead to 'green grabbing' and the erosion of traditional forest management. The document contends that REDD shifts responsibility away from industrialized nations and threatens the land rights and cultural values of forest-dependent populations. FoEI proposes an alternative based on the legal recognition of Indigenous and community land rights, collective forest management, and a structural transition away from fossil fuels based on climate justice.

The report documents various grassroots initiatives by Friends of the Earth (FoE) groups in Asia and the Pacific, focusing on community forest management, social and solidarity economies, food rights, and renewable energy. It advocates for a systemic transformation of economic and political systems in the region to address the entwined crises of inequality and climate change, calling for the removal of fossil fuel subsidies and the protection of customary land rights.

The document argues that climate equity requires developed nations to take the lead in reducing emissions and providing financial and technological support to developing nations due to their historical responsibility. It advocates for limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C through a carbon budget based on responsibility, capacity, and the right to sustainable societies. The text calls for a systemic economic transformation away from neoliberalism and fossil fuels toward community-led renewable energy and agroecology.

The report advocates for climate justice, asserting that wealthy nations bear a historical responsibility for emissions and must provide financial and technological support to developing regions. It critiques market-based mechanisms like carbon credits and biofuels, labeling them as 'false solutions' that protect corporate profits while harming local communities and ecosystems. The text provides specific examples of climate impacts in Nigeria, Kiribati, and the Himalayas, and proposes a transition for Europe toward a low-carbon society based on drastic emission reductions and lifestyle changes.

The report critiques neoliberal economics for causing inequality, environmental degradation, and the erosion of democracy. It proposes a transition toward sustainable economies by redefining economic goals to prioritise human needs and planetary limits over profit, advocating for the decentralisation of economic decision-making, the cancellation of ecological debt, and the regulation of corporate power. The authors call for a redesign of global financial and trade institutions, suggesting they be integrated into the United Nations and subordinated to multilateral environmental and human rights treaties.

Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific presents a series of community-driven projects aimed at transforming the region's economic and political systems. The report details successful initiatives in forest management, social economy, food rights, renewable energy, and sustainable tourism, arguing that these local models can be replicated and expanded if supported by national and regional policies.

The report critiques the role of international financial institutions and multinational corporations in promoting water privatization, highlighting resulting price hikes and environmental degradation. It documents specific cases of 'water wars' and corporate lawsuits in Bolivia, pollution in Indonesia and Peru, and the ecological impact of dams in France and Norway, while proposing community-led, sustainable alternatives.

The report finds that the majority of the seven examined High Level Groups are either corporate-controlled or unbalanced in favor of industry, leading to policy recommendations that prioritize industrial competitiveness over environmental and social standards. It highlights a lack of democratic legitimacy and inconsistent transparency, calling for the dissolution of industry-controlled groups and the establishment of more equitable consultation mechanisms.

The report identifies three primary areas of WTO negotiations that may undermine the UNCCD: agricultural market liberalization, the liberalization of environmental and water services, and the legal relationship between Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and WTO rules. It warns that export-oriented agriculture can lead to chemical-dependent farming and displacement of local communities, while the privatization of nature protection and water services may restrict indigenous access to resources. Furthermore, the document suggests that WTO dispute mechanisms might deter states from adopting the most effective anti-desertification measures if those measures are deemed trade-restrictive.

The guide provides alphabetical definitions of key WTO terms, including the agreements resulting from the Uruguay Round, the functions of WTO governing bodies, and specific legal clauses related to trade, environment, and intellectual property.

Friends of the Earth International has established a policy to prevent and prohibit sexual violence and harassment across its federation. The organization views the dismantling of patriarchy and power relations as necessary for achieving social, environmental, and economic justice. The policy is built on five core principles: zero tolerance, prevention, victim-centering, confidentiality and protection, and transparency with clear timelines. It specifically highlights the vulnerability of women of color, indigenous women, migrants, and LGBTQ+ individuals to institutionalized and systemic violence.

Friends of the Earth International argues that the COVID-19 pandemic shares root causes with climate and biodiversity crises, stemming from a capitalist and neoliberal system. The organization proposes a recovery based on four principles: abandoning neoliberalism and austerity in favor of state-guaranteed rights; enhancing multilateral cooperation and international solidarity, including Global South debt cancellation; strengthening democracy and human rights; and pursuing a transformative system change that shifts from industrial agriculture and fossil fuel dependency toward food sovereignty and community-owned renewable energy.

The document argues that the financialization of nature allows companies to bypass strict environmental regulations through biodiversity offsets and carbon credits. It details the emergence of a 'conservation industry' comprising specialized NGOs, think tanks, and financial institutions that create the standards and accounting methods necessary for this system. The report highlights how extractive industries, aviation, and agribusiness use these mechanisms to access protected areas and 'greenwash' their activities, while noting that actual private investment in conservation remains a small fraction of global financial flows.

The document outlines the dangers of BECCS, highlighting its potential to cause massive deforestation, land grabbing, and food insecurity. It argues that the technology is inefficient, carries risks of CO2 leakage, and serves as a justification for continued fossil fuel use through carbon offsetting. The authors advocate for a systemic shift toward agroecology, community-managed ecosystems, and a just energy transition based on renewable sources like wind and solar.

The report argues that the financialization of nature—transforming ecological functions into tradable units—serves corporate interests by facilitating greenwashing, easing regulatory compliance, and opening protected areas to extractive industries. It details the emergence of a new conservation industry comprising specialized NGOs, think tanks, and financial instruments like green bonds. The document contends that while these mechanisms are presented as solutions to the biodiversity crisis, they often act as a "mirage" of private investment, primarily benefiting corporations through improved credit ratings and a "social license to operate" while continuing environmental destruction.

The fact sheet criticizes the adoption of "nature-based solutions" by over 1,500 companies, asserting that these strategies allow firms to maintain polluting business models while claiming "net zero" targets. It highlights Shell and Nestlé as examples of companies using carbon offsets to mask continued emissions and environmental damage. The document advocates for "real zero emissions" through the cessation of fossil fuel extraction and the support of agroecology and community-led forest management led by indigenous peoples and local communities.

The document critiques the framing of 'nature-based solutions' (NbS) as compatible with agroecology, asserting that NbS are instead used by corporate and financial interests to maintain industrial agriculture and create speculative assets. It contrasts agroecology's holistic, emancipatory approach with the NbS model, which focuses on carbon sequestration to justify 'net zero' distractions and the continued use of fossil fuels and synthetic inputs. The text highlights how NbS can lead to land grabs and the marginalization of small-scale producers, opposing the goals of land reform and food sovereignty.